marijuana

When Marijuana became legalized in California, it was almost understood that a significant amount of the taxes the retail sales would generate would be used to fund drug treatment programs. However, that was not the case. Senate Bill 275 is being sponsored by the California Society of Addiction Medicine to help youth get good treatment delivered by the state.

A “Juul” device used often by minors to use “smokeless” products

As part of the bill an expert panel consisting of representatives from many communities, such as a representative of foster and homeless youth, county probation representatives, and a representative from the state department of education, would meet to discuss and advise the state on substance abuse.

According to drugtreatment.org, one in six teenagers admit to taking prescription drugs to get high or change their mood. Many California residents ask why if drugs are so easy for youth to get, why isn’t the state putting more money into treatment services for youth now that the state has a new resource for money- Marijuana.

“It’s clear that youth are harmed by drug use,” says Dr. Tim Cermak, a Marin County Psychiatrist. “We’re talking about tax revenue set up used for the treatment of drug abuse.”

Drug treatment services provided by the state is especially important to minorities. LGBTQ adolescents are 90% more likely to develop substance abuse disorders than their straight peers according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Senate Bill 275 could be essential to lowering those statistics by providing services to at-risk youth.

“Public sector programs (are) used to move in areas of underprivileged youth and minorities,” says Dr. Cermak. “$50 million is for communities that have been impacted the most, there will be quality standards for treatment programs that are started by private entities.”

If passed, Senate Bill 275 promises that hundreds of millions of dollars will be placed into services to give quality treatment to all youth, regardless of their means or background.

As the January 1st deadline to legalize marijuana distribution approaches, the Sacramento City Council recently discussed the improvements made to the city’s new Cannabis Equity Program and Cannabis Cultivation enforcement.

In March of this year, Sacramento celebrated it’s plan provide business permits to marijuana dispensaries and estimated to collect $6.3 million in revenue over the next three years. The marijuana business is booming, but in order to get a cannabis growers’ permit, there are strict requirements put in place.

All marijuana growers are required to get a conditional use permit and a business permit, a security plan, odor control, business plan, water efficiency plan, lighting plan, energy efficiency plan, a background check, and the security requirements must be written by a professional, specified to every location, be UL certified, and verified by the Sacramento Police department.

“The development of high standards is vitally important,” said Joe Devlin, Chief of Cannabis Policy and Enforcement on November 21st. “But the ability to enforce those high standards is how we will ensure the cannabis industry ultimately reflects the values of our city.”

However, some worry that the strict requirements unfairly marginalize the number of possible marijuana distributors. For example, the licensing fees for indoor grow rooms with up to 5,000 square feet are nearly $10,000 the first year, and close to $30,000 for a indoor grow room up to 22,000 square feet. Also, state and local agencies are able to deny licenses to people with felony convictions, specifically narcotics offenses or other crimes related to the once illegal marijuana business.

“The communities that have most been harmed by the decades-long war on drugs deserve to be at the front of the line to benefit from the legalization of cannabis, done right,” Mayor Steinberg said during a November 28th meeting.

Many other community members shared the mayor’s sentiment including Kevin Daniel, an employee at the Greater Sacramento Urban League and resident of District 2, and Malaki Amen, President of the California Urban Partnership and resident of District 5.

“I’m definitely in favor of some equity and I know Sacramento believes in equity as well,” Daniel shared on November 28th. “It’s important that those communities have access to scholarships to pay for some of the fees, maybe business loans…we have to make sure that our communities get a chance to bounce back from this lucrative industry and not be left behind on the sidelines to watch.”

“Councilmembers, this item presents a greater opportunity to launch Sacramento’s newest industry with decency and with fairness,” Amen expressed. “Today you have the power to heal families and neighborhoods that were disproportionately destroyed by marijuana jail sentences…legally ending institutional poverty and generational racism, this is an honorable way to strengthen our local taxbase and make the city that we love a place that truly works for everyone.”

On November 9th, California could become yet another state to pass an initiative to legalize recreational marijuana with Proposition 64. The Golden State is already one of 25 states including Washington D.C. where medical marijuana is allowed by law.

However, the Drug Enforcement Agency continues to believe that the drug has no medical benefit and is as dangerous as heroin and LSD. The DEA’s outlook on marijuana is confusing given that over half the country has laws permitting the drug for medical purposes and that its legalization could boost the state’s economy. In fact, many lobbyists are now hoping to help support the initiative.

“There are a lot of people with a vested interest that see California as the pot of gold,” said David Quintana to the SacBee, who is a partner and lobbyist for Gonzalez, Quintana, Hunter & Cruz, LLC. “They see that pot of gold will be shaped by the Legislature. They all want a seat at that table. They don’t want to be the one left out.”

It comes as no surprise that everyone wants in as California has become one of the more progressive states. According to data from back in late May by the Public Policy Institute of California, 60 percent of likely voters in the state were in favor to legalize recreational marijuana, while 37 percent were opposed.

Although Prop 64 should pass this fall, there may be those who disagree with the proposal given the cognitive effects the drug can have on the brain. According to drugabuse.gov, marijuana has many adverse effects, both short and long-term. The greatest downfall of the proposition is its lack of regulation for driving under the influence.

“[W]e anticipate drugged driving of those driving under the influence of marijuana will increase dramatically, along with DUI related traffic fatalities,” said Ron Lawrence, Vice President of the California Police Chiefs Association.” With no limit rules similar to alcohol (.08 BAC) or means to test for field sobriety such as a breathalyzer, driving under the influence of marijuana is more difficult to detect and test for.”

Although there is no exact way to test for driving under the influence of marijuana, the people of California will need to take responsibilities for their privilege. But, not only does this legislation given opportunity for economic growth, it may help with lowering incarceration rates as well. Data from the American Civil Liberties Union showed that more than half of the arrests made in the US are crimes involving marijuana and 90 percent of those arrests from 2001 to 2010 were for simply having it. Plus, the arrests also appear to have a racial bias as African Americans are over three times as likely to be arrested for marijuana than whites.

“Our current marijuana laws have undermined many of the things conservatives hold dear – individual freedom, limited government and the right to privacy,” said Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican who represents the 48th congressional district. “This measure is a necessary reform which will end the failed system of marijuana prohibition in our state, provide California law enforcement the resources it needs to redouble its focus on serious crimes while providing a policy blueprint for other states to follow.”

Likely to become the fifth state, or sixth since Nevada also has a proposition in place this November, California could pave the way for more states to push marijuana as a legal product within the economic infrastructure. In fact, California was the first to legalize medical weed in 1996 and now many others have decriminalized and legalized the drug for medical purposes. With the size of the population of the state, the largest in the country, the data that will be important as a means to push for legalization on a federal level.

And if there’s any doubts that legalization has little benefit, check out the great things it did for Washington state and Colorado after year one.

20 Hiram Johnson students were surveyed in a computer class about their history of smoking marijuana. Out of those who admitted to having smoked marijuana, 11 claimed to have started smoking in elementary school. 3 of those students said they were smoking by age 7 or 8 years old because members of their family smoked.

Many started smoking weed in junior high school. One student said, “I smoke because it makes me relax. ” Another student said “It relieves stress.” Some smoke because they feel like it and they’ve been through a lot in their past.

9 of the students surveyed believe marijuana is healthy for you while 8 of the students believe it is unhealthy.

Most students say smoking marijuana made them feel great. One student said it made him feel, “Bad, thats why I quit.”

One student said”I get to look back in time when I did and realize how much of a dumb person I was. After I stopped, my grades went from C’s to A’s and I’m proud of that. I’ve been more involved in school and I’m helping other students at a community center to persuade them to stop smoking.”

8 students have stopped smoking or planned to stop soon and 9 students don’t plan to quit. 9 students claim to smoke everyday.

6 students say they are setting a bad example for younger siblings. One student said “My family smoked around me since I was born so I don’t think its good or bad its normal.’’